Dean Barnett actually reviews the Obama resume and asks the question, "would you hire this guy?".

For over a decade I worked as a headhunter specialized in placing lawyers. I've often wondered what I would have made of Barack Obama's résumé if it had come across my desk.

I'd start off being impressed--very impressed. In the legal industry, almost regardless of a candidate's seniority, the first thing anyone looks at is the candidate's education. Even 17 years after graduating from Harvard Law School, Obama's work there remains his greatest strength. Obama graduated magna cum laude, near the top of the class. This is a real achievement. Being editor in chief of the Harvard Law Review is an even greater one.

It's when Obama leaves law school in 1991 that his résumé starts raising questions. He didn't begin a full-time job until 1993. Between 1991 and 1993, Obama divided his time between lecturing at the University of Chicago Law School, writing a book, and returning to his pre-law school activity, community organizing.

In 1993, Obama went to work for the small Chicago law firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill and Galland. He could have gotten a job with any major law firm in America. His belated selection of a boutique law firm that offered lower pay but a better lifestyle than the top firms is striking. A lot of people in the legal industry, rightly or wrongly, would infer a certain softness from Obama's chosen path.

The candidate who claimed the Democratic presidential nomination with a message of change has turned to a six-term senator and Washington insider for his running mate.

Barack Obama's choice of Delaware Sen. Joe Biden as the Democratic vice presidential nominee instantly bolsters the ticket's credentials on foreign policy, an area where Obama's background is limited. Biden, who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is one of Congress' most knowledgable and respected voices on national security.

Friday, August 22, 2008

In their muddled reactions to the Kremlin's invasion of Georgia, European states revealed a gap in perceptions that threatens to deepen: Those who suffered under the Soviet yoke sense the return of an existential threat, while those who thrived under the Pax Americana are merely annoyed at being disturbed. As Russian troops and their mercenary auxiliaries savaged a free, democratic country yearning Westward, the world got another lesson in how ineffectual Europe is in a crisis without American leadership.

Barack Obama’s presidential campaign has put the brakes on ads that were running in seven states carried by the GOP in the 2004 presidential election, FOX News has learned.

Of the seven states — including Alaska, Georgia, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota — Florida and Virginia are considered key battlegrounds this year. Obama’s decision to stop advertising in those states is raising eyebrows.

Aides to Obama told FOX News that the changes are related to the convention next week. They wouldn’t discuss the specifics of their ad strategy, but the Obama campaign insists that it has not pulled out of those states permanently, calling this a temporary suspension.

When Obama’s campaign took over the Democratic Party earlier this year, it embraced Howard Dean’s 50-state strategy, which is aimed at courting Democrats nationwide. The strategy has generated controversy, though, because many Democrats say it wastes money in states where they have no chance of winning.

The suspension of ads in some states comes after Obama and McCain exchanged ads Thursday accusing the other of being out of touch with the average citizen because of the number of homes he owns or the amount of money he has.

As Texas governor, he had brought in bipartisan reforms that called for standardized testing and increased accountability — as well as funding — for schools. He wanted to bring in the same approach nationwide. The result was No Child Left Behind, a bipartisan bill that vastly expanded Washington's control and spending over education. "You've got one of the most conservative presidents in U.S. history teaming up with Ted Kennedy to create one of the most micromanaged and centralized education policies we've ever seen," says Bruce Fuller, professor of education and public policy at the University of California at Berkeley.

Part of the deal Bush struck with Democratic allies in Congress was that they would ignore the objections of teachers' unions and go along with his aggressive accountability package if the President would raise education spending dramatically. The No Child policy set a target date of 2014 by which all students are expected to be "proficient" in reading and math on standardized tests designed by each state. Every school was given benchmarks for yearly improvement. Schools that do not make "adequate yearly progress" are placed on probation and can eventually have their staffs replaced or be turned into charter schools.

Despite shaping a Supreme Court with justices who want to erase race-conscious government policies such as affirmative action, Bush also agreed to track the educational performance of black and Latino students in an unprecedented manner. If any of those subgroups failed to reach targets, the entire school would be penalized.

Although Democrats complain Bush didn't spend enough, he more than doubled federal funding for poor schools. The result has been improvements on national tests overall, and a slight closing of the achievement gap between racial groups. The policy has faced blowback from teachers' unions, who are unhappy with schools being judged to be failing, and concerned about pervasive "teaching to the test" and an emphasis on math and reading to the exclusion of other subjects. But Bush succeeded in keeping education at the top of the national agenda, and legitimized the notion of tracking all children's progress in a way that will be difficult to abandon after his presidency. "Very few people want to return to the Neanderthal period that existed before strong accountability policy, to hyper-decentralization where local school boards in, say, Georgia could ignore the performance of black kids," say Fuller.

Democrat Barack Obama scolded Russia again on Wednesday for invading another country’s sovereign territory while adding a new twist: the United States, he said, should set a better example on that front, too.

The Illinois senator’s opposition to the Iraq war, which his comment clearly referenced, is well known. But this was the first time the Democratic presidential candidate has made a comparison between the U.S. invasion of Iraq and Russia’s recent military activity in Georgia.

“We’ve got to send a clear message to Russia and unify our allies,” Obama told a crowd of supporters in Virginia. “They can’t charge into other countries. Of course it helps if we are leading by example on that point.”

So our "charging into" Iraq--with dozens of allies, supported by a U.N. resolution, as a last resort after six months of build-up and negotiations, to unseat one of the cruelest dictators of modern times who had twice invaded neighboring states, was in violation of more than a dozen U.N. resolutions and was responsible for the deaths of something like two million people, who was shooting at American aircraft and had tried to assassinate a former President of the United States, in Obama's childish mind, was just like Russia's "charging into" Georgia, which resembles Saddam's Iraq in no respect. And, of course, we invaded a horrifying charnel-house so as to establish a democracy, whereas Russia invaded a peaceful democracy that it wants to re-incorporate into its empire.

Clue phone to Obama. It's Olympic time. Usually not a good time to compare the US to Russians.

Earlier this week, I read a comment on a blog post that mentioned how open minded Obama is.

The commenter went on and on about how Obama will seek input from others, be inclusive of dissent, and not just govern from his own world view.

If that is the case, then tomorrow Obama will announce The Billary as his vice presidential running mate. Right?

I mean how much more input could you receive from others as to their wishes. Democrats spoke in droves about their desire to see The Billary in the oval office. Surely, Obama would never discount the voices of all those voters.

In addition, women have spoken loud and clear about being dissed in this process. Obama would most certainly include as part of his decision all those disenfranchised voters who need to feel heard.

So text it to all your friends, The Billary is Obama's running mate. Unless, of course, all this talk about being inclusive is BS.

“Americans’ greatest moral failure in my lifetime,” he said, “has been that we still don’t abide by that basic precept in Matthew that whatever you do for the least of my brothers, you do for me.”

Hello!!!!!

Hey Barackstar, for the record, I donated a hell of a lot more to charity than you have in the past ten years and I've never made anywhere close to the amount of money you and Mrs. Messiah have. But I'm no different than any of my friends. See, we actually do. We don't wait before we can take something from someone before we do. We just do.

In addition, American's give one hell of a lot to charity; a much higher percentage than any population in the world.

I think Barackstar's problem is that he hangs with too many liberals. They do all the talking but none of the walking.

Say what you will about Republicans making a muddle of governing, but they sure know how to campaign. The turn of events that John McCain and his team have engineered in recent weeks is one of the most significant events of the campaign and now poses a serious threat of an upset this fall.

In just a few short weeks, they have not only thrown Barack Obama on the defensive and made him seem smaller but they have also made McCain seem larger and more commanding. And it has not just been one event but a string of them that they have tied together to propel McCain upward — from the ads (which most of us in the media didn’t like) to the way McCain seized upon the drilling and Russian issues to his winsome performance at Saddleback. The capacity to create issues and momentum practically out of the ether is the sign of a strong campaign. Both McCain and his team are impressing voters.

First David, for the record, the republicans still don't know how to campaign and/or govern. McCain shouldn't take Obama's downturn as a sign that he's doing something right. The GOP had a big ole softball handed to them this summer in the form of high gas prices. McCain still has a lot of conservative wounds to salve.

If he thinks that he can nominate someone like Joe Lieberman as his VP he can watch this poll improvements reverse like a Nastia Liukin pirouette.

These high gas prices just got people's attention. When Obama's response was to these high gas prices was to institute tax increases on oil companies, people understood that he was yet just another garden variety Jimma Carter liberal.

This race will always be about Obama. If the American public sees him as a true leader, he'll be our next president. If not, John McCain will reside at 1600.

Second, historically, liberals are like the trashy girl down the street. It's a nice flirtation to have when no one's looking but when prom time comes you go with old reliable.

Just look at the historical record. Liberals always start the race like the hare and republicans are more the tortoise. The electorate doesn't pay attention in July so liberals do well. The closer it comes to election day, the more people look at our cities and states and say, I don't think I want our country to look like Detroit.

Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Democrats keep wanting to believe that it's always their messenger that fails. It's actually the message. Obama will be no different. That's the message the McCain camp need to hammer.

Stanley Kurtz of the National Review has been attempting to review records held at the University of Illinois library which may shed some light on the relationship between Obama and William Ayers, American terrorist.

Unfortunately, the library has refused to allow Kurtz access to these records.

Doug Ross has a blow by blow account of the dust up as well as a great chronology of what we already know about their relationship.

It's a required good read for anyone who wants to know something about the man they call The Messiah.

A couple of weeks ago, I was at a festival where a candidate for political office was out hustling for votes.

When she handed me her brochure, I asked her point blank, what moral code do you use to justify taking wealth from one person to give to another?

She gave me the me the old "our democracy decides what's moral or not".

Really?

So I challenged her to a democracy game. The candidate, me and my buddy would vote on whether we would take her money and donate it to a local homeless shelter and if she refused we would take it forcibly; just like the government.

Of course, she wasn't up for that.

But Gordon, it's the collective wisdom and experience of our elected officials to determine what is fair and moral.

You mean the collective wisdom and experience of representatives like William "cold cash" Jefferson, who finds a freezer to be a safe place to hide his bribes?

Or how about Laura Richardson, who owns a property that was just cited as a "public nuisance"?

How about the wisdom of a Larry Craig, who finds that rest room stalls and a few toe taps is a good dating strategy?

What about the judgment of Ted Kennedy, who's sound judgment resulted in the death of a young woman?

Maybe guys like John Edwards, BJ Clinton, Eliot Spitzer, Marc Dann, who find that getting their penis serviced always comes before the public interest?

So I throw the question out to our readers.

Under what moral code is it OK to take the wealth from one to give to another? If you want to tell me democracy, me and my family will be over to your house for a few votes.

For the record, at that same festival, I signed a petition to get Cynthia McKinney on the ballot. There's a whole lot of somethin' in her head and I don't think it's wisdom.

When the Obama campaign talks about being inclusive and making consider outreach efforts to attract Catholics I have to laugh. Especially when I read this...

Democrats have invited more than two dozen religious leaders to pray or speak at their upcoming conventioin with a notable exception: DenverArchbishop Charles J. Chaput, a policy wonk and the leader of Colorado's largest religious denomination.

Yeah, that's how i would endear myself to Catholics across the country.Memo to democrats... People see better than they hear. Empty gestures are just that.

Thomas Sowell with a great piece on how amateurs routinely out perform experts....

When amateurs outperform professionals, there is something wrong with that profession.

If ordinary people, with no medical training, could perform surgery in their kitchens with steak knives, and get results that were better than those of surgeons in hospital operating rooms, the whole medical profession would be discredited.

Yet it is common for ordinary parents, with no training in education, to homeschool their children and consistently produce better academic results than those of children educated by teachers with Master’s degrees and in schools spending upwards of $10,000 a year per student — which is to say, more than a million dollars to educate ten kids from K through 12.

Nevertheless, we continue to take seriously the pretensions of educators who fail to educate, but who put on airs of having “professional” expertise beyond the understanding of mere parents.

According to U.S. Rep. Bob Brady, the local Democratic Party chairman, Sen. Barack Obama's general-election presidential campaign in Philadelphia will be run different from his primary operation, which relied more on volunteers than on Democratic ward leaders and did not provide street money on Election Day.

"We're not going to pay for votes or pay for turnout," Obama said before the Pennsylvania primary.

But Brady said that the campaign has promised street money to pump up turnout in November. And now that Obama is the official nominee, his campaign will team up with the city's Democratic ward leaders, who traditionally help get out votes.

Tuesday, August 19, 2008

Assuming this idiot survives his "accident", come November, when he gets out of the handicapped spot at his local polling venue, does this guy vote for....

Barack Obama?

John McCain?

Originally, I would think this would be a no doubter for Obama since only a Messiah could possibly heal this guy. But after Saddleback, I find out this kind of thing is "above his pay grade". So now I'm dumbstruck.

Dallas school superintendent Michael Hinojosa and two trustees defended new classroom grading rules Friday, and urged teachers and parents to learn more about the requirements before dismissing them as misguided.

Teachers have derided the new rules as being too lenient on lazy students by requiring teachers to accept late work, give retests to students who fail and force teachers to drop homework grades that would drag down a student's class average.

But Dr. Hinojosa asked teachers and parents to consider that in the long run the rules will help more students succeed.

"We want to make sure that students are mastering the content [of their classes] and not just failing busy work," he said.

Last week I had a brief conversation with a friend who indicated that many of the power brokers in our cities are, in fact, conservative republicans. So do you think the power brokers who decided that this was a good policy for educating students are conservative republicans?

Hey, he may be right. After all, if your goal in life is to keep minorities down and out what better place to start than creating a public school system where no one learns anything. The KKK would never have devised such a great system.

But somehow those suburban public schools, run by republicans, don't seem to institute these insane policies.

Not to pick on just Dallas schools, they're not the only incompetent school system around.

Or how about the Memphis city schools where they fired a former Fed Ex executive after two days of trying to reform the system's Nutrition Center.

I guess all these are just power plays from rich, white guys trying to hold somebody down. Except that it's the rich white guys who are getting fired in these scenarios. I would think if you were a power broker, you'd be doing the firing.

I wouldn't lay all the shooting deaths in Chicago on Obama. I would lay it all on the laps of every "progressive"/liberal/democrat who's governance has turned our cities into cesspools. Of course, Obama is a member of this elite group of smart guys.

Shortly after he was confirmed governor of New York earlier this year, David Paterson told a group of business executives that when he received congratulations from old friends he hadn't heard from in years, he was surprised how many no longer lived in New York.

"All of them basically said the same thing," Paterson told the group. "'Good luck in New York state, but we can't pay the taxes. The opportunities aren't there.'”

After that experience, Paterson presumably can understand the complaints of corporate executives recently surveyed by Development Counsellors International (DCI), which advises companies on where to locate their facilities. More than four in 10 of them have ranked New York as the worst state to do business--second only to California in unfavorable mentions.

The most common gripes included high taxes and anti-business regulations. Joining New York and California on the list of most unpopular states were New Jersey, Michigan and Massachusetts.

The DCI study, coming as it did amid growing talk of state fiscal crises around the U.S., is particularly revealing. Of the approximately $48 billion in accumulated budget shortfalls that the 29 states with projected deficits are facing, $33 billion, or two-thirds of the gap, is concentrated in those five states considered by corporate executives to be the least friendly to business.

Meanwhile, among the five states ranked as having the best business environments, Texas and North Carolina have no projected budget gaps, and Georgia, Tennessee and Florida are facing shortfalls amounting to about $4.1 billion, or less than one-tenth of the states' total.

I'm still waiting on a "progressive" who can point out one thing that democrats run that isn't falling apart.

Wow, pot found in Clermont county? Where's the news here? I always thought pot was our cash crop after corn and soybeans.Police have seized more than 1,500 marijuana plants growing in five townships, Clermont County Sheriff A.J. “Tim” Rodenberg said Monday.

The plants, which were about two-thirds of the way through the growing season, ranged in height from 4 to 8 feet.

They would have been worth about $1,000 apiece if fully grown – for a total of more than $1.5 million, Rodenberg said.

She doesn't realize it, but when Betty Carson worries out loud about no longer being able to walk five minutes from her senior citizen building to Kroger, and instead taking a bus once a week to a farther store, she's talking about an issue facing urban areas all over the country.

Her neighborhood could become a "food desert."

That's a buzz phrase to describe mostly low-income, inner-city neighborhoods left behind by grocery companies' moves to bigger, more profitable and often suburban, locations.

Kroger might close its McMillan Avenue store sometime after its lease expires in February if a lower rent can't be negotiated. The location is smaller than new stores, isn't as profitable and sits in a neighborhood the city admits has a problem with at least the perception of crime.

Aldi plans to close its Avondale store as soon as its new location opens on Ridge Road in Columbia Township.

"The perception of crime"? Let me clue the writer in on something, it's not "the perception of crime", it's actually crime.

Just to give you a for instance, try this one, which occured in a Cincinnati Krogers just last weekend.

A New Orleans man was arrested Saturday after he allegedly finished off a can of stolen beer in front of a store employee.

I mean c'mon that happens out here in suburbia all the time. Just the other day, I was grocery shopping out here in Redville when a guy in a business suit started doing beer bongs right there in aisle 11.

In a surprising admission that could become a major scandal in the presidential race, Barack Obama’s 40-page so-called “rebuttal” to Jerome Corsi’s book, The Obama Nation,

acknowledges for the first time that the senator once had a personal relationship with identified Communist Party USA (CPUSA) member Frank Marshall Davis, a key high-level operative in a Soviet-sponsored network in Hawaii.

But the 40-page report, advertised and sold to the media as a refutation of Corsi’s “lies,” doesn’t identify Davis as a hard-core communist and it dishonestly edits an article about Davis to eliminate references to his admitted involvement in CPUSA activities and make the black revolutionary writer and “poet” look like a civil rights activist.

In fact, Davis was a secret CPUSA member who continued his involvement in the CPUSA or its front activities into the 1970s, when he became Barack Obama’s mentor in Hawaii. Corsi’s book devotes part of chapter three, “Black Rage, Drugs, and a Communist Mentor,” to Davis.

Once again we see that Obama lies with dogs and expects us to believe he doesn't have fleas.

On some beaches around Santa Barbara, you could feel the oozing tar between your toes -- and that was long before a Union Oil platform five miles offshore spilled crud all over 20 miles of coast in 1969. For centuries, the tar naturally had seeped up through the sand, providing the native Chumash with caulking for their canoes.

Oh, another thing: My dad was an oil field roustabout, or driller or whatever job he could fill on a given shift. So were his dad, brother and cousins. They left their Tennessee farms and followed the migration to California for the 1920s oil boom.

My first summer job out of high school was in a Ventura oil field, an experience guaranteed to prod a kid into college if nothing else would. (But the oil job paid better than newspaper work, I soon discovered.)

So "Big Oil" never has been a big bugaboo for me. It was the producer of a vital commodity and provider of working-class jobs. Although oil derricks annoy many people as unsightly, I've always marveled at how they work, especially all lighted up at night.

Like a lot of Californians, however, when the drilling platform fouled our beaches, I became a NIMBY. Get those leaking monstrosities out of our waters. No more drilling. And enough people felt the same that California's coast became off-limits to any additional oil exploration.

That was nearly 40 years ago.

At that point, America was importing only 24% of its oil. Today, it's up to nearly 70% and rising, a ludicrous transfer of American wealth.

Back then, we hadn't yet fought any Middle East wars with one eye on oil pipelines.

And nobody dreamed of $4 gas.

California is the nation's biggest consumer of gasoline -- 45 million gallons a day, plus 10 million gallons of diesel. That makes us the third-biggest petroleum-consuming entity in the world, behind only the United States and China.

We are the nation's No. 3 oil-producing state, behind Texas and Alaska.

But California produces only 39% of the crude oil it uses. An additional 16% comes from Alaska and the remaining 45% is bought from foreign sources, according to the California Energy Commission.

First, let me say, I'm not a beach guy. One of the reasons is that there's nothing to see on the beach but a horizon. Zippo.

About ten years ago, I went down to Gulf Shores Alabama to my client's condo. From the beach there, you could see an oil platform way off in the distance. I actually thought it was kind of cool because it visually gave the ocean scale and space.

As we debate this whole drilling issue, I'm trying to figure out what makes Florida, New Jersey, and California beaches so much more valuable than Alabama's? By the way, that beach in Alabama was 100 times nicer than Daytona, Rehobeth, Ocean City, etc. all of which I've visited.

Second, how is it that it's more environmentally friendly for the Saudi's to drill in their country, load our tankers with crude, move the tankers thousands of miles to the refinery than it is for us to drill and ship?

Third, how is it in our best interest to keep shipping money to anti American regimes when we can utilize our own resources and keep the money internal?

Here's an article questioning the role of race in this year's presidential election...

STRUGGLING to explain Democratic candidate Barack Obama's inability to dominate his Republican opponent John McCain in the polls, Americans have started to think about the unthinkable: the race factor.

Almost 80% of Americans believe their country is on the wrong track, mired in an unpopular war and burdened with a failing economy. Yet the conventional wisdom of the presidential campaign now is that it will be a referendum on Barack Obama, not a judgement on the past eight years of Republican administration.

Score this round to the Republicans, for setting the agenda.

Polls consistently show a much tighter personal contest between Senator Obama and Senator McCain than they do between the Democratic and Republican parties.

"It's the right question to ask: why doesn't Obama have a much larger lead?" University of Maryland politics professor James Gimpel said yesterday. "I think the race thing is there. It has to be."

First, let me start by saying I'm one of the 80% who believes the country is going in the wrong direction.... a more liberal direction. That doesn't make me more inclined to vote for Obama since he's the candidate out of power.

Second, I know liberals knowledge of history consists solely of the performers at Woodstock but if we actually examine the presidential results since, oh, 1952, you will see that liberal candidates have won 51% of the popular vote exactly ONE time (Lyndon Johnson in 1964).

Liberal agendas just do not work in presidential elections. After all, our first black president, B. J. Clinton, had to run as a conservative and run against a corpse just to get a whopping 48% of the popular vote in 1996.

The liberal upside in any presidential election is probably about 51%. Meaning that a liberal has to get all of his base plus nearly all independents just to get a majority. In order to pull all of those independents, they have to run as a conservative. A truly liberal candidate who runs on a liberal platform will perform just about as well as Mike Dukakis or Walter Mondale did in their runs.

Obama made out great early on because he was an unknown and portrayed as a "new" kind of candidate.

As the public starts paying attention and witnessing his true liberal ideology, his poll numbers are starting to slide downward. In my mind, it's probably a miracle he's managed to get to 49% given his liberal message.

For those that want to make this about race, just remember he was no more black in February as he is today. Maybe the public likes corn for food instead of arugula.

“As a starting point, it means I believe that Jesus Christ died for my sins and that I am redeemed through him. That is a source of strength and sustenance on a daily basis. I know that I don't walk alone, and I know that if I can get myself out of the way, that I can maybe carry out in some small way what he intends. And it means that those sins that I have on a fairly regular basis hopefully will be washed away.” Quoting from the book of Matthew, Obama said it also meant an obligation to “the least of these.”

That's a nice sentiment from a candidate who donated all of $2,500 bucks to charity to take care of "the least of these".

I guess for Obama, you can only take care of "the least of these" when you take someone else's money.

Also, I guess an unborn baby doesn't qualify as one of "the least of these".